CHAPTER V.

"Take him for all in allWe shall not look upon his like again."

The study of western Philosophy led Chitta Ranjan to believe in atheism. This revolting note has found expression in some of his poems. But providentially the light of Vaishnava Philosophy came to dispel this atheistic gloom from his mind. Chitta Ranjan gradually understood the lofty ideals of Vaishnavism, the sublimity of Hindu theism. This Religion of Love and Sacrifice became a part and parcel of Chitta Ranjan's life. For this transformation in him his mother's teachings were to a great extent responsible, for they had a great deal to do in fostering and developing the germs of excellence with which he was born. He came to believe in the religious rites of Hinduism and on the death of his mother he performed the Sradh ceremony according to the Hindu rites. He is very fond of Vaishnava Sankirtana which he held now and then in his house. Chitta Ranjan gradually became a zealous devotee of Hinduism and had his name struck off from the role of members of the Brahmo Samaj.

But Vedantism which is the source of the Brahmo faith in Bengal left its marks on Chitta Ranjan's mind. The key-note of the Vedanta is its doctrine of Oneness. One reigns everywhere,—in the rippling of the waters of the ocean,—in the murmuring of the leaves,—in the melody of the birds,—in the charming beauty of blooming flowers,—and in the effulgence of the moon and the sun. This one is the Self. There is nothing but this self. For this reason, though a Hindu in the true sense of the term,Chitta Ranjan is an avowed opponent of the caste-distinction prevalent in our society. He has two daughters and a son. His elder daughter was married to a member of the Kayastha community and he married his only son to a Vaidya girl of Western Bengal. These marriages he celebrated according to the Hindu rites with the sanction of great Sanskrit scholars. But as usual the whole orthodox Hindu society was in a state of tumult over the inter-caste marriage of Chitta Ranjan's elder daughter. The bigoted leaders of society who sacrifice even their conscience for the so-called social prestige got very nervous and tried to create a scene but Chitta Ranjan was firm. He was at first not in favour of even appointing a Brahmin priest to conduct the ceremony. He argued as he had no caste-prejudice he should not prefer a Brahmin. He should rather select a Vaidya scholar deeply versed in the Sastras to conduct the marriage ceremony of his daughter. For days together Chitta Ranjan and his wife had long discussions over this matter but could not arrive at any final conclusion. One evening about a fortnight before the celebration, his wife, who was in favour of appointing a Brahmin priest left the room, when she failed to convince her husband. She did not come back till a late hour at night and found her husband alone in the room and in great mental agony tears were rolling down his cheeks. She approached him and said:—"Just consider a bit coolly. You want to reform the present Hindu society but not to leave it altogether. Then you should do it step by step. If you now do not even have a Brahmin priest, no one will have the courage to follow you and your purpose will not be served. On the other hand, if you try to introduce inter-caste marriages only and do it now with the sanction of a Brahmin priest, many will perhaps follow your lead. So that considering everything you should now have a Brahmin priest to conduct the marriage ceremony of our daughter". Chitta Ranjan was convinced and exclaimed with deep emotion, "Oh! What light have you shown me!" The matter was settled and Chitta Ranjan was relieved of his mental agony. The marriage ceremony was also smoothly performed according to Hindu rites by a Brahmin priest. In fact on every critical occasion Chitta Ranjan has found in his wife a wise counseller and a true friend. Many a Sastric scholar of India-wide fame approved of this marriage, the list included men like Mahamahopadhaya Pandit Haraprasad Sastri, late Mahamahopadhaya Dr. Satish Chandra Vidyabhusan and Mahamahopadhaya Pandit Yadeveswar Tarkaratna. We must mention here to Chitta Ranjan's credit that this marriage took place long before Mr. Patel's Bill was introduced in the Imperial Legislative Council.

To purge the Hindu society of the thorns and thistles that have beset it is a problem very dear to all true Hindu patriots. With this end in view Chitta Ranjan never fails to protest against the degrading customs of our society. Once in a table talk he remarked, "What a pity that our society is not even now roused from its eternal sleep. Take the instance of the present dowry system. Many a Snehalata has been sacrificed in its burning flame, yet the parents of bride-grooms are not brought to their senses. They are ever determined to make money by selling their sons even at the cost of social well-being and family happiness. But the parents of brides do never rise up against this degrading custom, fearing lest they mar the future of their girls by losing desirable bride-grooms. The parents should rather educate their girls; if by chance they do not get married, they can earn their own livelihood and may be so many Carpenters and Nightingales in our society". Such is the view of Chitta Ranjan about the present Hindu society. Generous, large-hearted and magnanimous as Chitta Ranjan is, there is something in the texture of his mind that is above the ordinary run. Few men who battle for the right, have the calm fortitude, the cheerful equanimity with which Chitta Ranjan battles to fulfil the burning aspirations of his soul. He stands high among those who have been able to display

"One equal temper of hearts,To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield".

In course of one of his lectures Chitta Ranjan once remarked, "Work for my country is part and parcel of all the idealism of my life. I find in the conception of my country, the expression also of divinity." In fact the welfare of our country is very dear to his heart, for this he has given his all ungrudgingly and spent his valuable time selflessly whenever the occasion demanded it. Keenly has he felt the unhealthy condition of our villages and the illiteracy of the people, and long has he striven to convince our countrymen that our national regeneration lies in the sanitary and educational reform of our villages. Under his guidance and patronage there has been started several years back a private society for the improvement of the Bikrampur villages. It has for its main object the sanitation of the villages and the education of the people of Bikrampur and last not least it tries to make the poor villagers independent of others in earning their livelihood. Chitta Ranjan has now and then given large donations to its fund. About three or four years back he gave in the hands of the workers of the society a large sum for digging a tank to supply pure drinking water to the villagers. In the early part of the year 1919 when with the visitation of a great famine in East Bengal most people of the villages were in imminent danger of dying of starvation, this society under the patronage of Chitta Ranjan and his cousin Satish Ranjan started relief work in the villages. The distress was no doubt acute but it was to a great extent beingrelieved. But just towards the close of the year a heavy cyclone passed over East Bengal and the ever-violent Padma as if to vie with the violence of the wind ran inundating both her banks; the whole of Bikrampur appeared desolate, and heaps of dead bodies were seen floating on the river for several days together. Most of the villagers were left houseless, their provision had also been swept away and they fell an easy prey to imminent starvation and contagious epidemic. Chitta Ranjan could no longer stay quiet at home. He himself appeared on the scene at a great personal sacrifice. Under his guidance was started a relief society called the "Bengal Relief Committee" of which Chitta Ranjan was the Treasurer. He himself gave a donation of Rs. 10,000 and persuaded many of the large-hearted Marwari Merchants of Bengal to contribute a large sum to the fund. On this occasion Chitta Ranjan visited almost all the villages of East Bengal in spite of all sorts of difficulties on the way; he went to the villages and started centres of relief work, each centre comprising three or four village unions. The centres were entrusted with proper funds to feed and clothe the distressed and homeless villagers. The relief committee tried a new innovation in social service which was very commendable as a means of removing poverty from the villages. It arranged to pay the poor villagers each a small amount of money with which they were to revive their home industries and thereby out of the sale-proceeds they would be able to make themselves independent of any external pecuniary help. For as regards the poor the great object should be to make them independent; the great danger is of making them more dependent. It is no doubt a good thing to make them comfortable, but in helping people if we know that welove them and not pity them, we must try to form their character, otherwise our charity will be cruel. We read a short poem in our early years which throw some light on the nature of true charity.

"I gave a beggar from my little storeOf well-earned gold. He spent the shining oreAnd came again, and yet again, still coldAnd hungry as before.I gave a thought, and through that thought of mineHe finds himself a man, supreme, divine,Fed, clothed, and crowned with blessings manifold,And now he begs no more."

Such is the nature of Chitta Ranjan's charity which has aimed not merely at alleviating want, but at creating independence.

Patriotism is with Chitta Ranjan another name for socialism by which we mean his ardent love for the suffering humanity. He loves this country as it gives shelter to his poor brethren whom his religion has taught him to look upon as incarnations of Narayana.

When in April 1917 the political leaders of Bengal asked Chitta Ranjan to preside over the annual session of the Provincial Conference, he delivered a speech in Bengali which was unique in character and form and in which Chitta Ranjan stated that socialism and patriotism were almost identical so far as our country was concerned. He said in course of this speech:—

"Some people might say: 'This conference is for political discussion; what has talk about Bengal to do with it?' Such a question would be symptomatic of our disease. To look upon life not as a comprehensive whole but as divided among many compartments was no part of our national culture and civilisation.... Must we not view our political discussionsfrom the stand-point of the whole of our countrymen? And how shall we find truth, unless we view life thus comprehensively and as a whole?... After all, what are the ultimate object and significance of this political thought and endeavour? If we wish to express it in one word, we shall have to say—what has been said so often—that the object of our politics will be to build up the Bengalees into a nation of men.... It is therefore that we shall have to ascertain what our present condition is, and in order to ascertain this we shall have to take first into consideration the material circumstances of our people. This again will require that we shall have to enquire into the condition of our peasantry—whether agricultural wealth is increasing or decreasing and whether agriculture is flourishing or otherwise. This in its turn will lead us to a further enquiry still, viz, as to why our people are leaving their villages in increasing numbers and are coming to settle within towns. Is it because the villages are insanitary or is there any other reason for that? Thus we find that an adequate discussion of politics will involve a consideration of agricultural questions as well as the questions of village-sanitation. At the same time we shall have to consider whether we can improve our material condition even by bringing under tillage all the available culturable land of the country. If we can't, then we shall have to consider the question of industry and trade as well."

But why do we fail to enquire into the condition of our country in this way? We never look to our country, never think of our countrymen, of our past national history, or our present material condition, for the vanity arising from false education has rendered us blind and callous. Chitta Ranjan has truly remarked in the same paper.

"We boast of being educated; but how many are we? What room do we occupy in the country? What is our relation to the vast masses of our countrymen? Do they think our thoughts and speak our speech? I am bound to confess that our countrymen have little faith in us.

... Besides, we seem to look upon them with contempt. Do we invite them to our assemblies and our conferences? Perhaps we do when we want their signatures to some petition to be submitted before the Government; but do we associate with them heartily in any of our endeavours? Is the peasant a member in any of our committees or conferences?"

By the grace of God this mentality has now been changed. The masses and the classes of our country have associated themselves in the present national movement. The peasant delegates are now honoured members of even the Indian National Congress. The note of warning that Chitta Ranjan struck was very opportune. This set our leaders to feel the heart-throbbing of our mother country. But what led us astray? Chitta Ranjan has justly remarked:—

"Mimic Anglicism has become an obsession with us: we find its black foot-print in every walk and endeavour of life. We substitute meeting houses for temples; we perform stage-plays and sell pleasures in order to help charities. We hold lotteries in aid of our orphanages; we give up the national and healthful games of our country and introduce all sorts of foreign importations. We have become hybrid in dress, in thought, in sentiment, and culture and are making frantic attempts even to be hybrids in blood. What wonder, then, that in this new pursuit of western ideals we should forget thatmoney is only a means to an end and not an end in itself?"

What has made us shallow; why have we, the so-called educated, become strangers to our own countrymen? For like other ideals, our ideal of education also has become mean and impoverished; and so what was easy and natural—we have made it complex and difficult. We must even now beware and listen to the wise warning of Bankim—a warning all too unheeded when it was first uttered. But one thing is certain that unless we change the whole organism of our educational system and make it harmonise with our national ideals even our existence is threatened. For this education has created a wide gulf between the educated and the masses, which our national existence demands to bridge over. About our present system of education Chitta Ranjan has said:—

"It has imparted an element of unnecessary anglicism into our manners and modes of life—so that in outer seeming it might almost appear as if the educated Bengalee had little organic touch with the heart of his countrymen. Then, again this education has made us familiar not with things but with words; it has made us clever but not men.... We have acquired a despicable habit of looking down with contempt, upon those who have not received this English Education of ours; we call them "illiterate" and "uneducated" and sneer at their ignorance. But these uneducated countrymen have hearts and sympathies; they worship their gods, they are hospitable to guests, they feel for the suffering and distress of their neighbours.... To me it seems perfectly clear that if we want to lead our newly-awakened national consciousness in thepaths of true knowledge, education should be diffused through the medium of our own vernacular and not through the unwholesome medium of English."

The reason for this ghastly failure in our national life is palpable from other points of view also. We the educated few, never co-operated with the masses of our countrymen. We are not only proud of our education, but also proud of our wealth and proud of our caste: and this three-fold pride has so deadened and blinded our senses that, in all our endeavours we leave quite out of account those who are the flesh, blood and back-bone of the land. The gentry of our country are mostly ill educated and therefore their pride springs from emptiness. To speak the truth, the so-called educated have no right to mix with their countrymen. They are narrow, callous and anglicised. They fail even now to understand that in this crucial moment of Indian History, the whole country should stand as one in working out her future destiny. Here the Hindus and the Mohammedans should co-operate, the Brahmins, the Vaidyas and the Kayasthas should come out hand in hand with the peasants and the chandals. Chitta Ranjan harped upon the same theme in his presidential address at the Provincial Conference:—

"Those who constitute 40 out of 46 millions of our countrymen,—those who produce our bread by their labour—those who in their grinding poverty have kept alive the torch of their ancient culture and ancient polity—those whom our English civilization and English culture and English law-courts have yet been powerless entirely to corrupt—those whom the oppression of Zemindars and Mahajans have failed to crush—are we,—a corrupt and effete handful—are we their betters and superiors? We boast of our Hinduism; but with ourfalse pride of caste we are striking Hinduism at its very root. Even now while there is time, let us perceive our fearful and heedless blunder. In our oppressed and down-trodden fellow-brethren let us recognise the image of Narayana: before that sacred and awful image, let us abandon all false pride of birth and breed and let us bend our heads in reverence and true humility. These seething millions of your land—be they Christians or Mahomedans or Chandals—they are your brothers; embrace them as such, co-operate with them and only then will your labours be crowned with success."

In taking a survey of our present condition, we have to think of the poverty of the peasant-class, and closely connected with this question of poverty is the question of village depopulation. The village is the centre of our civilisation and culture; and hence the decay of village-life is bound to cripple and enfeeble our body-politic. Now the cause of this village depopulation is two-fold. In the first place, there is the ravage of malaria and in the second place, there is the temptation of city-life with its ease, luxury and commercial and money-making facilities. Thus modern cities like some huge reptiles are swallowing up the ancient village centres of our country; and one of our chief duties will be to re-establish the health, prosperity and welfare of the villages. In order to do this, we shall have to improve the water-supply of our villages, to remove jungles, to educate the common people in the laws of health and sanitation. Also in order that agriculture may flourish, we shall have to establish banking institutions upon a small scale. For this combined and harmonious work we must have a plan. Chitta Ranjan has suggested one in his presidential address at the Provincial Conference of 1917:—

Our first step will be to organise all the villages of each district into a number of village groups or unions. Where one village is sufficiently large and populous, that by itself will constitute one union or group. In the case of smaller villages, several of them will be combined to form one group or union. Then a census must be taken of the adult males of each village-union: These will form the primary village assemblies; and they will elect from among themselves a panchayet or executive body of five members. This panchayet or executive body will have the sole administration of the village-group in its hands. It will look to sanitation; it will arrange for water-supply; it will establish night-schools; it will arrange for industrial and agricultural education; in short the domestic economy of the village-group will be entirely in the hands of the Panchayet. Besides, in each village-group there will be a public granary; each agricultural proprietor will contribute to this granary according to his quantity of land; and in years of drought and scarcity, the resources of this public granary will be drawn upon to feed the people.

In case of petty disputes, civil or criminal the panchayet will be the sole deciding authority, but in the case of larger disputes, they will report to the district civil and criminal courts; and their reports will be treated as the sole plaints or complaints in such cases.

In the next place, the primary assembly of each group, will, according to its population, select from five to twenty five members to the district Assembly. These district assemblies will consist of members numbering from 200 to 500 and will exercise the following powers:—

(1) It will exercise general supervision over the working of the panchayets and the affairs of the village group.

(2) It will devise ways and means of the better performance of the functions of panchayets; and it will be directly responsible for the education and sanitation of the district capital.

(3) It will devise means for the improvement of agriculture and cottage industries.

(4) It will supervise the sanitation of the villages included in each village-group: and will be directly responsible for the sanitation of the district council.

(5) It will start such industrial and business concerns as may be best suited to further the resources of the district.

(6) It will employ chowkidars and peace-officers for the villages.

(7) It will have sole charge of the district police.

(8) Each district assembly will elect its own President and will appoint sub-committees for the discussion of different subjects.

(9) For the provision of cheap capital, each district assembly will open a bank: this bank will have branches in each village-group.

(10) The district assemblies will have power to raise by taxation the money necessary for its requirements.

(11) The present local and district boards will be abolished.

(12) Necessary laws will have to be passed to place the primary and district assemblies on a legal basis.

This out-line of work is very closely connected with Indian socialism. This is what we now call Swaraj or self-government of the villages. These institutions did actually exist in our country from very ancient times; they grew and developed with our growth, and they have a peculiar harmony with the genius of ournational character. Chitta Ranjan has therefore proposed only reversion to our older social institutions. But life among us now is not so simple as it was before; it has become complex, difficult and intricate. Hence what was inchoate requires to be put into a system. The panchayet was a natural out-growth of our ancient village community! It consisted of those five persons who naturally and easily emerged into prominence by their qualities of character and intellect. The authority of the panchayet lasted only so long as the community at large tacitly accepted their authority. Now the question arises, "Will the Government entrust so much power to us?" Again there are the Anglo-Indian papers crying themselves hoarse, "No no, there is so much of anarchism in the land, it will lead to fearful abuses if the people are entrusted with any large share of power." But the real fact is just the opposite, if the people are given opportunities of serving their country on a larger scale, the so-called anarchism will die out of itself. Of this Chitta Ranjan says in his address:—

"Since the days of the swadeshi movement our young men have been possessed with the ardent desire to serve their country. At the time of the Ardhodoy yoga (the most auspicious moment for taking a bath in the Ganges), and again at the time of the Damodar floods of 1913, this desire for service found noble vent in action; and the help rendered by our young men on these two occasions has been repeatedly acknowledged even by high officials of the Government. But unfortunately much of this noble energy and zeal goes utterly to waste; there is no permanent channel through which it can be made to flow; there is no work of durable utility to which we have been able to apply it. Hence a feeling of impatience and despair has arisen in the minds of ouryoung men; and sedition is the outer manifestation of this feeling of impatience and despair."

It will be the part of wise statesmanship not simply to check the symptom but to cure the disease—not simply punish sedition but to root out the deep seated cause which gives rise to it. Our young men labour under the impression that the bureaucracy will give them no opportunity of doing real service to their country. This impression must be removed and they must be given opportunities for larger co-operation in the affairs of administration of the country. These young men have hearts to feel and a burning zeal for service; they think that instead of being utterly suppressed the activities of these young enthusiasts ought to be given proper field and scope. The English have no doubt done us immense deal of good and we are grateful to them for that. By holding before our eyes the ideal of an alien culture and civilization, the English have roused us from the stupor, torpidity and lethargy of spirit into which we had gradually come to sink. They have helped to awaken our national consciousness and to re-establish our national vitality. We are no doubt grateful for these manifold services. But are there no reasons for the English to be grateful to India? Are they not in honour bound in return of the many benefits they have derived from us to give us every scope of shaping our national life? Chitta Ranjan has also harped upon this point in his address at the Provincial Conference:—

"I am confident that the praise and gratitude which are their due for these manifold services will flow forth in an abundant measure from our hearts. But let us look to another aspect of the question. What was England before her advent to India? What was her position in the hierarchy of world powers? Can it be denied that the sovereignty of India increased the power and prestige of England ahundred-fold and more? If then India has reason to be grateful to England, is not England also under a corresponding debt of immense gratitude to India? Of the gratitude of India, proofs have been forth-coming again and again. Of the gratitude of England, the proof is now to come; and if you refuse to grant our legitimate prayer, we shall take it that your gratitude is an empty and meaningless phrase."

To a patriot when he goes to take a survey of the present condition of India, the first thing that presents itself is the deplorable state of the agriculturists; and that at once reminds us of our poverty. We all know that in the absence of trade and commerce agriculture is the chief means of our subsistence. In his address at the Bengal Provincial Conference Chitta Ranjan has presented before us a pitiable picture of our peasantry. The annual income of a peasant of our country ranges from sixteen to twenty rupees. This amount is certainly insufficient for a peasant even to keep his body and soul together. A prisoner in a Government Jail in India gets Rs. 48 annually for his subsistence. The comparison clearly shows that for bare subsistence the peasants have to incur debts. There is not one single village in Bengal where at least 75% of the inhabitants are not in debt; and there are villages where this frightful indebtedness extends to the whole of the population. Thus it appears, first, that the peasant by tilling his land does not earn enough to give him an adequate livelihood; and secondly, that out of the little that he earns a portion finds its way into the pocket of the "Mahajan". And poverty is the source of all corruption, in the case of the peasants poverty grinds them in two ways. In the first place, it makes them weak, feeble, spiritless, and in the second place it has become a frightful source of theft and robbery. Thus from whatever point of view we consider the matter, the removal of poverty seems to be one of our chief and foremost problems.

In order to fight out poverty agriculture will not be sufficient for us. Without industry and commerce our poverty will never be removed. We had commerce though not on European lines. Time was when we earned our own bread and wove our own clothes. We had corn in our granaries; our cattle gave us milk; our tanks supplied us with fish; and the eye was smoothed and refreshed by the limpid blue of the sky and the green foliage of the trees. All day long the peasant toiled in the fields; and at eve returning to his lamp-lit home, he sang the song of his heart. For six months the peasant toiled in the field: and for the remaining six months of the year he worked at the spinning wheel and distaff as was most consonant with the natural genius of his being. To-day that peasant is gone—his very breed extinct; gone too is that house-hold with its ordered and peaceful economy of life. The granaries are empty of their golden wealth; the kine are dry and give no milk; and the fields once so green are dry and parched with thirst. The evening lamp is no more lighted; the house-hold gods are no longer worshipped; even the plough cattle have to be sold in order to give us some poor and meagre sustenance. The tanks have dried up; their water has become unwholesome; and the peasant has lost his natural freshness and gaiety of temperament. What will remedy this? Chitta Ranjan has thus said in his address—

"Agriculture is not sufficient to give us our subsistence. Trade and commerce we must adopt; only our road must not be the road of Industrialism. In the days of old when our life was natural, normal, we had our own fashion and method of trade—a fashion dictated by the law of our being, by the genius of our soul. There we find that when the season of agriculture was over, our peasants would weave their clothes and prepare other articles of domestic use. They had not to look forward to Manchester to clothe them.Our cottage industries have perished; and the muslin-industry of Dacca and other parts of Bengal, once so famous and prosperous—has practically vanished. So also has vanished cotton cultivation—once conducted on an extensive scale but the secret of which now seems to have died out. Why should we not take to the spinning wheel as before and weave our own clothes? The brass ware industry of Bengal—that also has practically disappeared, chiefly for lack of patronage; for economic prudence aside, even our æsthetic taste has grown so coarse and vile that we prefer false and tawdry imitations to genuine and durable articles of value. Thus all our national industries have vanished and with these have vanished our wealth and prosperity."

How to reconstruct these industries and restore a portion of our ancient affluence? We must have no traffic with industrialism, for our simple industries are powerless to cope with the dynamic force of western industrialism. In the first place we have to give up our luxury and licence. They have filtered down even to the cottage of the cultivator. We must give them up if we wish to awaken the powers of our latent self and so invigorate the whole of our social and national life. Home-spun and coarse clothes should not prickle us. The temperance and restraint which will be necessary in order to sacrifice our luxury will be healthful and beneficent for our soul. Curtailment of luxuries which means non-importation of foreign articles will conserve our wealth and give a chance of new life to our dying industries and starved handicrafts.

As a true patriot Chitta Ranjan foresaw as early as the year 1917 that our national regeneration lay in the curtailment of our luxuries. To get rid of the materialism of Europe we must turn to our home industries. He advised his countrymen to fall back upon the spinning wheel and to weave their own clothes, be they coarse or fine. He has often said that until we, as a nation, are purged of the impurities consequentupon western license, all our healthy growth must become impossible. For it is certain, that

"Nation grown corruptLove bondage more than liberty—Bondage with ease than strenuous liberty."

Chitta Ranjan's life may well be compared to an Æolian harp which gives out different notes as different gusts of feelings play on it. With the internment of Mrs. Annie Besant it sounded a new note—a note inspired by an ardent love of humanity. From this time dates his real entry into practical politics. At a meeting held on the 25th July 1917 to protest against the internment of Mrs. Annie Besant, Chitta Ranjan delivered a speech in course of which he remarked:—

"The Prime-Minister said the other day—'The development of India is not only an economic but a political necessity, the British Empire is founded not only upon the freedom of the individual but upon autonomy of its parts uniting in one common-wealth people differing immensely from one another in race, language, religion and colour.' The utterances of His Majesty's Ministers are at once a promise and a hope. Every order of internment is a protest against the redemption of that promise and the fulfilment of that hope. I protest against these internment orders because whether any promises have been made or not every order of internment is a violation of natural justice and an outrage on humanity.... I do not think that the God of Humanity was crucified only once. Tyrants and oppressors have crucified humanity again and again and every outrage on humanity is a fresh nail driven through His sacred flesh.... The Anglo-Indian Press is never tired of saying to us: "Do not be impatient, there is plenty of time." There is no nation on the faceof the Earth more patient than the Indian Nation. But there is a limit to human patience and I say to those doubtful friends, 'As soon as you transgress that limit, you forfeit the right of asking us to be patient.' When we find the utterances of our officials are at variance with their action, have we not right to say, "What is the good of your making promises?—You do not really mean what you say."... What are we that we should say "peace, peace," when there is none."

In course of another speech delivered at a meeting on October 2nd 1917, Chitta Ranjan dwelt at length on the policy of internment and demanded the release of the gentlemen who had been interned. He said:—

"There is hardly a home in East Bengal from which one or more persons have not been interned. Every home in East Bengal is filled with sadness to-day because these people have been snatched away from their homes and imprisoned without trial or without proof. I say this policy is un-British, is opposed to all the time-honoured traditions upon which the British Empire is based. It is opposed to all rules of common sense and prudence and uprightness and the sooner this policy is abrogated the better for the peace and prosperity of the empire. At a time when the British Government in its wisdom has declared its policy that Home Rule in some shape or other must be granted to this country, that some sort of responsible Government is necessary for the foundation and preservation of the empire; is it wise then to detain these men against popular opinion, against the universal desire of the Indian people?"

On August 20, 1917, the Secretary of State made the most notable utterance in the House of Commons:—"The policy of His Majesty's Government, with which the Government of India are in complete accord, is thatof the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive realisation of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire." This announcement gave rise to a new ray of hope in the minds of the people who were growing dissatisfied with the existing system of government and were demanding progressive reforms. The Anglo-Indians were mostly against the policy of Self-Government in India. Some of them made very angry speeches. One gentleman is reported to have said that if there was a government by the people and for the people there would be no security for life and prosperity. Chitta Ranjan gave a splendid retort:—

"If the Anglo-Indians want to make India their home, let them do so and we will work hand in hand with them in the interest of the Indian Empire. But if they come here to make money, and all their interest lies in how best to make it, they are no friends of India, they have got no right to call themselves Indians, they have got no legitimate right to oppose the granting of self-government to the people of India."

In a meeting of the Anglo-Indians one Mr. Arden Wood was reported to have said: "If racial feeling is to be dominant in Indian politics the time will come, when, we the British, will either have to leave India or reconquer it." It is difficult to take this foolish speech seriously. In course of one of his speeches Chitta Ranjan referred to it and said:—

"They may leave India if they find it unprofitable to stay in India. They may stay in India if they find it profitable to do so but the tall talk of reconquering India is a comical statement. If this gentleman does not know, he ought to know that India was never conquered. India waswon by love and by promise of good government. India was never conquered and God willing, it will never be conquered for all time to come. India will impress her ideal, her civilisation, and her culture upon the whole world."

Some of our countrymen believe that Chitta Ranjan bears an ill will against the Europeans as a class. This belief has no basis at all. Those Englishmen who had any opportunities of knowing him personally would bear this out that much as he condemned the present system of Bureaucratic Government he had no racial feeling against them. He has many intimate friends among the Europeans. Sir Lawrence Jenkins, the late Chief Justice of Bengal, who was on very good terms with Chitta Ranjan, once enquired of him why he alone was not seen in the Calcutta Club when many other respectable Indians graced it with their presence. Chitta Ranjan openly spoke out his mind and said, "My Lord, before answering your question, I should mention here a peculiar custom of our country. Every Indian house-holder of the higher castes has in his house a place fitted for religious discussions where members of the lower castes are not admitted, but adjoining it he sets apart another place where all are equally welcome. Your Bengal Club and Calcutta Club can well be compared to the above two places. You do not admit natives into your Bengal Club, but as if to show your generosity you have fixed the Calcutta Club as a meeting place of the Black and the White. But do you not think, my Lord, that when you make this distinction you rather insult the Indians by admitting them to the Calcutta Club?" Sir Lawrence Jenkins was much pleased with these noble words of Chitta Ranjan and thence forward his respect for him was enhanced in a hundred-fold degree.

Again in 1916 when Mr. Montagu came to India Chitta Ranjan was for the first time invited to the Government House. He went there and learnt that he was invited atthe suggestion of the Secretary of State himself. The subject for discussion was the political condition of India at that time. In course of the conversation the question arose if India was just at that time fit for self-government and His Excellency the Governor was of opinion that she was not. Chitta Ranjan could not bear this unjustified remark; he said with a retort—"If after bearing the responsibility of educating India for the last one hundred and fifty years, you have failed to make us fit for self-government, the fault is surely not ours." His Excellency became red with anger at these fearless words of one of his subjects and immediately left the place. But Mr. Montagu was much pleased with this just remark of Chitta Ranjan and talked with him for hours together over many important topics relating to the welfare of India.

On another occasion when he was staying at England during the Puja holidays one of his Bengali friends introduced him to Lord Morley. After the formal introduction Lord Morley asked him, "Are you a Native?" Chitta Ranjan replied with a smile, "Certainly I am." At this frank reply Lord Morley was so very impressed that afterwards he mentioned this fact to his friend Sir Lawrence Jenkins (who had just then retired from the Chief-Justiceship of Bengal) and spoke very highly of Chitta Ranjan. Sir Lawrence could not but then utter these few words—"And this is the man your government wanted to deport."

In fact Chitta Ranjan has never borne any racial feeling against the Europeans but has only opposed the present system of Bureaucratic Government. In course of one of his speeches he has remarked:—

"When I ask for Home-rule or Self-Government, I am not asking for another Bureaucracy. In my opinion Bureaucracy is Bureaucracy, be that Bureaucracy of Englishmen, or of Anglo-Indians or of Indians."

When in accordance with the announcement of August1917, Mr Montagu, the Secretary of State came to India to learn at first hand what reforms were actually wanted by the people themselves, the Nationalist party of India thought it proper to convene meetings at different places of the Provinces so as to advise the political associations of the country to demand full responsible Self-Government at once. None of the leading pleaders and barristers of Calcutta was ready to go to the mufassil for that purpose at a great personal loss. But Chitta Ranjan to whom the question of the welfare of his mother-country was ever dearer than life itself could not but respond to this call of duty. "Work for my country is part of my religion"—this is the motto of his life. He left Calcutta, and visited different places and educated the public in the question of national welfare on Indian ideals. For though he obtained western education, he never forgot our ancient ideals. Of this he spoke in a lecture at Mymensingh delivered in October 1917:—

"Much as I venerate European culture, much as I love and much as I acknowledge my indebtedness to the education which I had in Europe, I cannot forget that our nationality must not rest content with borrowing things from European Politics."

In a lecture delivered on the 11th October 1917 at Dacca, Chitta Ranjan dwelt on the nature of the Self-Government that India stands in urgent need of:—

"There is one thing to which I desire to draw your attention and it is this; that in framing the scheme you must not be swayed by a feeling that the Government will not grant this or grant that. What the Government will grant and what the Government will not grant, that is the business of the Government, we have got only to consider what is necessary for our national well-being, if you find that certain steps are absolutely necessaryfor our national development, do not fail to put that down in your scheme out of timidity."

In course of another speech delivered on the 14th October 1917 he added:—

"Our Self-Government does not mean the Self-Government of the Hindus, the Self-Government of the Mahomedans; Self-Government does not mean Self-Government of the land-holders; Self-Government means Government by all the People of India in which all interests are to be represented and if there are any classes who are depressed, they ought to be told that the sooner Self-Government is introduced into this country the better for them: they ought to be told that we have no desire to restrict the franchise in any manner at all to the disregard of any such interest, and if any kind of responsible government is introduced into this country, which is made responsible to the people, they will have the power in their hands to oppose any oppression or injustice in every possible way."

Lord Minto was undoubtedly responsible for the reign of terror in India; it was he who first introduced repressive laws in this country. They were directed against the natural aspirations of the Indians. While protesting against these laws Chitta Ranjan had the courage to tell the Bureaucratic Government—"That we are fighting for the ideal expressed by the King's Ministers; we are fighting for carrying out that very policy which has been declared in England by His Majesty's Ministers".

In 1918 the Congress and the Muslim League considered in a joint meeting that Self-Government for India could be delayed no longer. Otherwise the growth of Indian Nationality and the development of Indian manhood would be impossible. The Bureaucracy in this country would not grant it. Therefore it was necessary that Indian demands should be carried across the seas to the great BritishDemocracy. The Indian National Congress and the Muslim League thought it proper to send a deputation to England to tell the British Democracy that Indians wanted the right to build up their own constitution—a constitution which alone would enable us to secure the development of Indian nationality and the development of Indian manhood. A public meeting of the Citizens of Calcutta was held on the 18th March, 1918, under the Presidency of Babu Motilal Ghose to support the Indian Deputation to England, when Srijut Chitta Ranjan Das said:—

"It is plain that you may agitate as long as you like; you may demand your right, as you have a right to demand, but you will not get the Bureaucracy in this country to support you. You must, therefore, go to their masters....

If we find that we are not to get Self-Government, we have at least the right to get an honest answer. Let the British Democracy say, if it likes, that this war is a war of liberation of humanity, but liberation of humanity does not include the liberation of India. When I consider the objections put forward to the grant of Self-Government, I can hardly keep my patience. They say we are not educated enough to get Self-Government. My answer is: whose fault is it? For the last 150 years you have been governing this country and yet you have not succeeded in educating the people of this country to such an extent that they may be fit for governing themselves. Do we not know that Japan was made only in 50 years? You have had 150 years. Why is it that at the end of that period we are told that we are not fit to govern ourselves? Nobody really believes that the time has not come.... We are further told that we are divided between many sects. We follow different religions, we have got different interests to serve and so on. If you say that we are not fit for Self-Government, because we are divided in our interests, and in our religions, my answer isthat Self-Government and Self-Government alone is the remedy of that."

It has in season and out of season, been dinned into our ears that a subject people has no politics. It was therefore that political discussions, had hitherto been carried on in the spirit of singing laudation to the administration of Government, however palpable its defects seemed to be. This mendicant spirit in politics has been overthrown by the exertions of Chitta Ranjan and his compatriots in the field of national work in this country. Chitta Ranjan's ideal of political life was neither Utopian nor Quixotic. All that he demanded was, that all men are entitled to have equal opportunities without which the progress of human society and consequently the progress of a nation comes to a stand-still. He wanted for his countrymen the opportunities for self-realisation which would render pointless and inappropriate at the present-day Matthew Arnold's remarks:—

Back to Index Next